Society's Child
Vivian Geraghty was forced to resign from teaching English at Jackson Memorial Middle School in August after Jackson Local School District officials tried to force her to speak in a way that would violate her sincerely held religious beliefs, an action which she believes was unconstitutional.
According to an ADF press release, Geraghty's sincerely held religious beliefs and scientific understanding are that a person is male or female based on sex, not personal identity, and participating in a student's social transition violates those beliefs by forcing her to communicate messages she believes are untrue and harmful to the student.
"No school official can force a teacher to set her religious beliefs aside in order to keep her job. The school tried to force Vivian to recite as true the school's viewpoint on issues that go to the foundation of morality and human identity, like what makes us male or female, by ordering her to personally participate in the social transition of her students. The First Amendment prohibits that abuse of power," said ADF Legal Counsel Logan Spena. "Jackson Local School District officials nonetheless forced Vivian to resign because she resisted this unconstitutional command and explained that it was her Christian faith that made her unable to participate in her students' social transition."
The saga began for Geraghty when two students adopted gender identities inconsistent with their biological sex, and requested that school staff participate in their social transition. Both students had adopted new names and one requested the use of pronouns that were inconsistent with the student's biological sex.
The school counselor emailed school staff instructing them to participate in the students' social transition leading to Geraghty approaching the principal, seeking a solution that would allow her to continue teaching her class without personally affirming as true things that she believes are false and harmful.
Rather than reaching an agreement, however, Geraghty was told that she "would be required to put her beliefs aside as a public servant," and that her unwillingness to affirm the students' self-declared transgender identities amounted to insubordination, and that continuing to teach in a way consistent with her beliefs would "not work in a district like Jackson." Geraghty was then told if she would not participate in the students' social transitions, she must resign immediately.
"Jackson Local School District officials require their teachers to immediately and personally validate a child's gender transition even if doing so violates their religious beliefs, conscience, or sound judgment," said ADF Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer. "Increasing evidence suggests that this approach may lead adolescents to unnecessarily pursue dangerous medical interventions like puberty-blocking drugs, cross-sex hormones, or life-altering surgeries. Vivian treated every student with equality and respect, and it was unlawful for school officials to terminate her employment simply because she wanted to avoid using her voice to validate ideas that violate her faith and jeopardize her students' wellbeing."
Elsewhere in the US, legal action is being taken against teachers who facilitated the social transition of their students. In Wisconsin, parents of a girl whose teachers accommodated her change of name and pronouns against their wishes are suing the school district for violation of their parental rights, and parent rights group Parents Defending Education is suing an Iowa public school district for allowing children to socially transition without parental consent or knowledge.
Reader Comments
A: Pauline theology.
Yeshua taught the Kingdom to come and the individuals conduct needed to make it into the Kingdom.
I see this alot, experts on Christian theology simply cannot see that Yeshua never promoted religion, he taught how to live in accordance to the will of his Father (Yahweh).
Christianity as a term for a religious adherant is first mentioned in the book "Acts" as a specific identifyer, only Christianity is actually opposed to the teachings of Yeshua on account of the LAW (commandments) which Paul preached was abolished, while Yeshua taught the law was paramount to "the way" to the Kingdom.
There are 24 flat contradictions between what Yeshua taught and what Paul preached. Funny how even after 2000 years people still refuse to look deeper into the differences between Yeshua and Paul, it requires an open mind and most "Christians" I know are arrogant Jews pretending to know Yeshua, but neither read the bible nor accept what Jesus alone taught, that is because Paul preached "Anomia" (lawlessness) and assured "Christians" only need faith without works, which leads them astray.
what Yeshua taught
(Matthew 22:34-40 34) When the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 One of them, an expert in Moses’ Teachings, tested Jesus by asking, 36 “Teacher, which commandment is the greatest in Moses’ Teachings?” 37 Jesus answered him, “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and most important commandment. 39 The second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as you love yourself.’ 40 All of Moses’ Teachings and the Prophets depend on these two commandments.”I always thought that was a simplification if not outright refutation of Moses' laws, which are telling us what not to do rather than telling us what to do. I think Mosaic law, while on its surface seems like common sense, when posed in the negative as they are might actually be subversive. How is that? Consider a simple task, like tossing a piece of trash into the can. Think to yourselfm "Don't miss!" and you are focusing attention on the outcome you don't want, and attention being the coin of this realm, that's paying attention to that which you don't want. Not exactly a good doctrine for salvation. Like I said, I think it's subversive, perhaps intentionally. IMO that's why Matt 22 is a refutation of Moses.
(BTW, my family name is "Moser", which is one letter way from either "Mose s" or " l oser" on either end (which has always amused me), and "moser" also means traitor in Hebrew. I grew up on Beulah Road, beulah meaning "promised land."
To me, Matt 22:34-40 means the same as this:
"Brahman alone is Real." (Adi Shanakaracharya, in commentary on the Upanishads)
"All this is Brahman" is maybe also part of that Shankaracharya quote, but I'm not sure. It certainly has been said by lots of swamis and is a concise way to say:
"This is my Self in the innermost heart, greater than the earth, greater than the aerial space, greater than these worlds. This Self, this Self of mine is that Brahman." — Chandogya Upanishad
If Brahman alone is real, then what else is there to love, and to do so with all one's heart. And, if the Self is Brahman, then so are all selves, such as our neighbors, who also deserve our love.